Why I became a Republican...

[jillian]

I was once a Democrat. I actually registered voters for the Democrat party (paid BTW as all parties do). I voted for Bill in 92. I started loosing faith when his first order was to over turn the 24 hour waiting period for abortions.

Don't you think women are smart enough to not impulsively have an abortion. Or should we have to go back twice and grovel and have someone lecture us about our poor decision-making skills.

I find a 24 hour waiting period insulting. I'm not a child in need of the protection of the government.

Then came the over turn of power in the house in 94. They started making change. One of the things they changed was the Free Lunch program through our schools. They closed down the federal office that ran it. They passed the money directly down to the states, with no shoe strings attached to get it. The Democrats had children marching on the floor holding empty lunch trays, chanting 'don't take our food'. My oldest happened to be on Reduced Lunch prior to the change. When the change happened, we got a letter saying that all Reduced Lunches are now Free Lunches. There was more money getting to where it was needed.

I'd say you'd have to know far more about what other changes were administered. What party ran things in your state before the money was turned over and after? Did the board of ed change in compositon? Or maybe it was other factors, like Clinton's economic boom, or his balancing the budget...etc.

I decided at that point to give up being a Democrat and registered with no party. I did a lot of reading up on the history of the Republican party. I learned that they are the ones that caused a lot of the great changes that needed to happen in our country. I registered as a Republican before the 96 elections. I'm now proud to call my self a Republican.

So incompetece in government and in the waging of war, secretiveness, the pointelss loss of our bravest young people's lives fighting Bush's War, debt that your grandchildren will have to pay and a unitary executive are outweighed by a 24 hour waiting period and school lunch.

Interesting.

 

[JeffWartman]

I find a 24 hour waiting period insulting. I'm not a child in need of the protection of the government.

Funny, considering you support the political party which believes exactly that.

 

[Alucard]

This statement could not be more wrong.

There's plenty of evidence. Just no proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore it's a theory. Without evidence there couldn't be a theory.

What are you talking about Jeff, evidence is proof!

And here is the evidence I have to prove that.

Definition.

ev·i·dence /ˈɛvɪdəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ev-i-duhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -denced, -denc·ing.
–noun 1. that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.

You need no evidence to come up with a theory...

One usually comes up with a theory then seeks some linking evidence to help support that theory...

There is absolutly NO Evedence of Reincarnation yet the theory still exists.

 

[Alucard]

I find a 24 hour waiting period insulting. I'm not a child in need of the protection of the government.

How come if you murder a pregnant woman you get charged with Two homicides yet we still live in denial that abortion is murder...

 

[JeffWartman]

What are you talking about Jeff, evidence is proof!

And here is the evidence I have to prove that.

Definition.

ev·i·dence /ˈɛvɪdəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ev-i-duhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -denced, -denc·ing.
–noun 1. that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.

You need no evidence to come up with a theory...

One usually comes up with a theory then seeks some linking evidence to help support that theory...

There is absolutly NO Evedence of Reincarnation yet the theory still exists.

You need to read that definition more clearly. See my bolded section.

Evidence is NOT necessarily proof.

You can say what you want about the holes in the theory of evolution, but there is NOTHING to say creationism is anything more than a myth.

 

[Alucard]

You need to read that definition more clearly. See my bolded section.

Evidence is NOT necessarily proof.

You can say what you want about the holes in the theory of evolution, but there is NOTHING to say creationism is anything more than a myth.

Well then according to your definitions the plain fact that 90% of the worlds population believes in some form of inteligent design along with some historical facts supporting it would be evidence enough to support the theory!

 

[Care4all]

How come if you murder a pregnant woman you get charged with Two homicides yet we still live in denial that abortion is murder...

I believe this charge can only come, if the unborn child is in a viable stage, (able to survive outside the mother's womb), a woman murdered near the end of her pregnancy like laci peterson?

I do not believe this charge of double homicide can be made if the woman killed was in early pregnancy?

 

[ReillyT]

I believe this charge can only come, if the unborn child is in a viable stage, (able to survive outside the mother's womb), a woman murdered near the end of her pregnancy like laci peterson?

I do not believe this charge of double homicide can be made if the woman killed was in early pregnancy?

I think that would be a state by state question.

 

[Annie]

I think that would be a state by state question.

I think that SHOULD be a state by state decision.

 

[JeffWartman]

Well then according to your definitions the plain fact that 90% of the worlds population believes in some form of inteligent design along with some historical facts supporting it would be evidence enough to support the theory!

I said creationism, not intelligent design. You understand the difference, right?

 

[Alucard]

I said creationism, not intelligent design. You understand the difference, right?

To be honest Jeff Your making me wonder if I do... Both are theories that involve some sort of supreme being as a creator... True?

What is the difference?

 

[maineman]

To be honest Jeff Your making me wonder if I do... Both are theories that involve some sort of supreme being as a creator... True?

What is the difference?

to bring it down to terms the superspy might understand: creationism does not believe in dinosaurs, intelligent design does

 

[Mr.Conley]

Well thought out post.

I think we have alot of Independents now, because the Republicans ended up SPITTING on their Contract with America, spitting on their own SUPPOSED VALUES regarding our gvt...

It turns out, that it was all LIES and Spin to get the voters support, only to turn their backs on these values once in complete POWER....imo.

Care

Exactly, this administration has totally steamrolled the values the Republican party once stood for. It has exploited its supporters and attempted to whore itself out just to stay in power. Then they've pursued lackadaisical and unwise policies in Iraq that, regardless of whether you initially supported the war or not, have resulted in disaster. Now we're still running deficits that, while smaller then before, are still jawdroppingly massive. Not to mention the party's fixation on impossible social issues like flag burning and abortion. The worst part is that the entire time the Republican Congress stood by and did nothing that could pretend to be oversight. Now, I'm still not a democrat, but the Republican party's performance throughout this administration has be shockingly inept.

 

[JeffWartman]

To be honest Jeff Your making me wonder if I do... Both are theories that involve some sort of supreme being as a creator... True?

What is the difference?

They are completely different theories.

In simple terms...

Creationism is the belief that the world began as stated in Genesis. Let there be light, Adam and Eve, etc.

Intelligent Design is the idea that the world is too complex to just arise as a coincidence of nature.

Once again, this is stated in overly simple terms.

 

[Gunny]

I believe this charge can only come, if the unborn child is in a viable stage, (able to survive outside the mother's womb), a woman murdered near the end of her pregnancy like laci peterson?

I do not believe this charge of double homicide can be made if the woman killed was in early pregnancy?

As I understand it, the charge can come based on the woman's intent. Has nothing to do with that arbitrary "viable" term.

 

[uscitizen]

Why I became a Repbulican ?
So I could vote against the worst of them in the primary.

I am technically a Republican and have been for over 10 years.

 

[Gunny]

Exactly, this administration has totally steamrolled the values the Republican party once stood for. It has exploited its supporters and attempted to whore itself out just to stay in power. Then they've pursued lackadaisical and unwise policies in Iraq that, regardless of whether you initially supported the war or not, have resulted in disaster. Now we're still running deficits that, while smaller then before, are still jawdroppingly massive. Not to mention the party's fixation on impossible social issues like flag burning and abortion. The worst part is that the entire time the Republican Congress stood by and did nothing that could pretend to be oversight. Now, I'm still not a democrat, but the Republican party's performance throughout this administration has be shockingly inept.

And a lot of us bailed on the Dems for the same reason. The fact is, NEITHER party represents, we the people. They represent their own self-interest, and a partisan political battle contrived to keep us so busy fighting amongst ourselves we're not supposed to notice them divying up the goods.

 

[Alucard]

They are completely different theories.

In simple terms...

Creationism is the belief that the world began as stated in Genesis. Let there be light, Adam and Eve, etc.

Intelligent Design is the idea that the world is too complex to just arise as a coincidence of nature.

Once again, this is stated in overly simple terms.

So it is like I said, both theories believe in some sort of supreme being or God the Created or assisted in the creation of man... right?

That doesnt sound all that different?

 

[actsnoblemartin]

I consider myself more of a conservative because i believe in an ideas, not a party. Dont get me wrong, im voting republican, beause the modern day libs, are worse to me.

And a lot of us bailed on the Dems for the same reason. The fact is, NEITHER party represents, we the people. They represent their own self-interest, and a partisan political battle contrived to keep us so busy fighting amongst ourselves we're not supposed to notice them divying up the goods.

 

[Alucard]

to bring it down to terms the superspy might understand: creationism does not believe in dinosaurs, intelligent design does

What are you trying to say MM?

According to your post, People that believe in God, dont believe in dinosaurs...

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard!!!